Simulated BCS Rankings Week Seven: Ohio St., Florida St. Land Comfortably In Top 5 With BCS Looming

biggerbcslogo

The BCS rankings are looming. Just one week until we enter the final phase of the college football season. And, as if seemingly on queue, the upsets came in droves this weekend.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Clemson Tigers
4 Ohio State Buckeyes
5 Florida State Seminoles
Scroll down for more

Stanford, Oklahoma, Georgia and Michigan suffered losses at inopportune times, and the simulated BCS rankings reflect the sea change. Sure, Alabama, Oregon and Clemson land in familiar spots, but after that, things get different fast. How are we figuring this out?

  • We’re using the normal method for the Coaches’ and Harris polls, taking vote share, which is explained on our BCS Formula page.
  • We’re also using all available BCS versions of the BCS component computers, which this week includes: Colley’s Matrix, Massey’s BCS, Sagarin, Anderson & Hester and Billingsley. However, we will not remove any of the rankings, as BCS usually does, as to get a better overall sense of where we stand. No need to eliminate when we don’t have the complete picture to begin with. Five computers used means a total possible score of 125 in the component.
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with about 94% accuracy

With just a week before we get a real version of the BCS on the night of Oct. 20, we have a simulated version that’s nearly 100% accurate, and interesting things have begun to happen.

Ohio State and Florida State’s steady climb has finally begun to pay off, as the Buckeyes and Seminoles land at No. 4 and No. 5 respectively. Finally, after weeks of languishing well below their full BCS potential because of weak computers and a bevy of undefeated teams to contend with, the Buckeyes and Seminoles are primed for possible runs at a title game bid.

The next group of contenders is led by teams now well within striking distance if things can fall their way. One-loss No. 6 LSU, No. 7 Texas A&M and No. 10 South Carolina, plus undefeated No. 8 UCLA and No. 9 Louisville fill out the rest of the top 10.

Undefeated Missouri, the darling of the computers with the third-highest overall computer aggregate, lands at No. 13, while new Big 12 frontrunner Baylor lands at No. 11.

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the seventh week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — October 14

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9842
2 Oregon Ducks .9387
3 Clemson Tigers .8781
4 Ohio State Buckeyes .8373
5 Florida State Seminoles .8345
6 LSU Tigers .7428
7 Texas A&M Aggies .6920
8 UCLA Bruins .6726
9 Louisville Cardinals .6252
10 South Carolina Gamecocks .5766
11 Baylor Bears .5721
12 Stanford Cardinal .5716
13 Missouri Tigers .5695
14 Miami Hurricanes .5479
15 Georgia Bulldogs .4554
16 Texas Tech Red Raiders .3594

Simulated BCS Rankings Week Six: Clemson, Stanford Continue to Battle

biggerbcslogo

Though we’re still two weeks removed from the first official BCS rankings of the season, with so many teams running through the early part of their schedules without a bump, it seems like we’re bound to be in for some real intrigue.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Clemson Tigers
4 Stanford Cardinal
5 Ohio State Buckeyes
Scroll down for more

The kind of back-and-forth in the rankings that we’ve come to expect manifests itself this week with the ongoing battle between Clemson and Stanford, two teams that have traded the No. 3 spot in our simulated BCS rankings since the start of the season. How are we figuring these out?

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’ve begun to use all available BCS versions of the BCS component computers, this week that includes: Colley’s Matrix, Massey’s BCS, Sagarin, Anderson & Hester and Billingsley. However, we will not remove any of the rankings, as BCS usually does, as to get a better overall sense of where we stand. No need to eliminate when we don’t have the complete picture to begin with. Five computers used means a total possible score of 125 in the component.
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with about 61% accuracy

This week, despite Stanford’s bounding gains in the computer rankings, it’s Clemson that takes the No. 3 spot. That’s what happens when the two-thirds of the formula based on the voting polls favors the Tigers. That margin, however, is small. To the point where no more than a handful of votes in either the Coaches’ or AP polls could have swung the tides in Stanford’s favor.

So with the Tigers and Cardinal set in their 3-4 tandem, we instead turn our attention to Ohio State and Florida State, two teams that saw wide-spread support from the voters in the early going, but struggled to find that computer love every BCS contender needs.

All that has changed in the last few days, as victories over Northwestern and Maryland, respectively, have given the duo new life in the computers. The Buckeyes averaged a 8.6 ranking while Florida State pulled in an average of 4.6 across the five computer rankings.

Both are stronger than they had been in the early goings of these simulations, positive steps for two teams possibly gearing up for a fight to the finish with a bevy of other undefeated squads.

But enough talk — here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the sixth week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — October 6

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9789
2 Oregon Ducks .8893
3 Clemson Tigers .8736
4 Stanford Cardinal .8627
5 Ohio State Buckeyes .8186
6 Florida State Seminoles .7982
7 Georgia Bulldogs .7466
8 Oklahoma Sooners .6560
9 LSU Tigers .6256
10 Louisville Cardinals .5699
11 UCLA Bruins .5664
12 Texas A&M Aggies .5617
13 Miami Hurricanes .5100
14 South Carolina Gamecocks .4769
15 Baylor Bears .4668
16 Michigan Wolverines .3827

Simulated BCS Rankings Week Five: Ohio State Up To No. 5, Buckeyes Here To Stay?

biggerbcslogo

As the real BCS rankings get closer, focus paid to one marquee game can have big ripple effects across the country if things turn out one way or another.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Stanford Cardinal
4 Clemson Tigers
5 Ohio State Buckeyes
Scroll down for more

This weekend, that game was LSU-Georgia, and the Bulldogs’ second victory over a top-10 team before September is even out (especially after losing to a top-10 team to start the year) was felt in all over the BCS component rankings this week.

Georgia’s leap into the top echelon of the simulated BCS rankings is significant, however, it’s Ohio State’s step in the top five that should turn heads.

How did we figure these out?

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’ve begun to use all available BCS versions of the BCS component computers, this week that includes: Colley’s Matrix, Massey’s BCS, Sagarin and Billingsley
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with about 56% accuracy

Ohio State, well back of the pack in recent weeks despite its support in the polls, leaps to No. 5 this time on the strength of teams moving out of their way and an improved showing in the computers. LSU’s loss helped to make the Buckeyes’ entrance into the top five possible, while also bolstering the rankings of the teams that occupied similar space last week. The Buckeyes just clear No. 6 Georgia (.0066 behind) and No. 7 Florida State (.0234 behind).

Stanford is another clear beneficiary, picking up much of LSU’s support and using another easy Pac-12 victory to gain some steam and move up to No. 3, just hopping over No. 4 Clemson.

The Bulldogs land at No. 6, as they rebound on the strength of the country’s most difficult schedule. Oklahoma also lands some unexpected gained support at No. 8, likely as a result of Oklahoma State’s loss that placed the Sooners as the clear favorites in the Big 12.

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the fifth week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — September 29

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9914
2 Oregon Ducks .9107
3 Stanford Cardinal .8594
4 Clemson Tigers .8550
5 Ohio State Buckeyes .7604
6 Georgia Bulldogs .7538
7 Florida State Seminoles .7370
8 Oklahoma Sooners .6569
9 Texas A&M Aggies .6154
10 LSU Tigers .6078
11 Louisville Cardinals .6058
12 UCLA Bruins .5366
13 South Carolina Gamecocks .5021
14 Washington Huskies .4983
15 Northwestern Wildcats .3756
16 Miami Hurricanes .3737

Simulated BCS Rankings Week Four: LSU Jumps Into The Fray

biggerbcslogo

After a weekend somewhat lacking in true tests for the nation’s best, not much changed around the country in terms of how voters saw teams lining up for possible title bids.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Clemson Tigers
4 LSU Tigers
5 Stanford Cardinal
Scroll down for more

But lurking underneath was a shift in a few key areas that allow the newest set of simulated BCS rankings to swap around a few key players, and set us up for an interesting stretch of weeks before the final BCS frame begins.

The biggest move is that of LSU’s which leaps from No. 6 to No. 4 this week, still trailing the top three from last week — Alabama, Oregon and Clemson.

How did we figure these out?

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’ve begun to use all available BCS versions of the BCS component computers, this week that includes: Colley’s Matrix, Massey’s BCS, Sagarin and Billingsley
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with 56% accuracy

As the season has progressed the result is a better connected set of teams. There are ways to compare early games. That can help voters in the AP and Coaches’ polls, but really, those extra games help the computers make sense of a limited amount of data.

This increase in sample size has given LSU a strong early computer edge, as the Tigers collect the third-best computer ranking aggregate this week, behind only the Tide and Ducks.

On the opposite side of that discussion rests a team like Ohio State, still struggling mightily with its computer support and paying for it in these simulations, as the Buckeyes land at No. 7. But it’s still early, much can change.

For now, it seems as if another contender has entered the fray in LSU and one that would be especially dangerous when they meet Alabama in early November.

For now, however, here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the fourth week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — September 23

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9851
2 Oregon Ducks .9367
3 Clemson Tigers .8442
4 LSU Tigers .7957
5 Stanford Cardinal .7910
6 Florida State Seminoles .7442
7 Ohio State Buckeyes .6909
8 Georgia Bulldogs .6047
9 Louisville Cardinals .5969
10 Oklahoma State Cowboys .5808
11 Texas A&M Aggies .5492
12 Oklahoma Sooners .5187
13 UCLA Bruins .5145
14 South Carolina Gamecocks .4647
15 Washington Huskies .3761
16 Miami Hurricanes .3578

Simulated BCS Rankings Week Three: Ohio State Enters Top Five, Florida State Climbing

biggerbcslogo

Like in years past, it takes a certain kind of result to truly convince everyone that the top preseason teams are truly worth of the spot. In recent years, those teams have often included Alabama and Oregon, and like in these past couple of years, the Crimson Tide and Ducks passed that early test.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Clemson Tigers
4 Stanford Cardinal
5 Ohio State Buckeyes
Scroll down for more

The respective victories over Texas A&M and Tennessee in week three staked Alabama and Oregon to a large lead in the early simulations of the BCS rankings. In fact, the distance between Alabama and Oregon, which is still around a sizable .04, is less than a third of the gap between Oregon and No. 3 Clemson.

How did we figure these simulated BCS rankings out? We made the following changes to the BCS formula, to account for the pieces we have and the pieces we’re missing:

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’re ONLY using the available, reasonably well-connected and up-to-date BCS computers, which at this point is just Massey’s non-BCS, Sagarin’s and Billingsley’s rankings. You’ll notice that at this point, “well-connected” means computer systems with a preseason bias and component. As the season progresses we can eliminate those rankings which hold such a bias as the teams become well-connected in 2013 alone.
  • Available computers, but not included: Massey’s BCS and Colley’s Matrix.
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with 50% accuracy

You might have noticed that Stanford and Clemson flip-flop again this week, thought their differences are small when you look at the bound either team would have to make an impact on the top two squads in the country.

Weeks of lingering in the lower regions of the computer rankings continues for Ohio State, but the Buckeyes are finally able to leap into the top five at No. 5 — up one spot — despite it’s much higher viewing in the polls.

LSU and Florida State also improve their lots, as LSU is up one spot and Florida State up two as we reach the halfway point in the first month of the season. Plenty of football to be played before the first BCS standings, but it’s a fun exercise…

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the third week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — September 16

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9951
2 Oregon Ducks .9561
3 Clemson Tigers .8167
4 Stanford Cardinal .7939
5 Ohio State Buckeyes .7562
6 LSU Tigers .7464
7 Florida State Seminoles .7278
8 Georgia Bulldogs .7200
9 Texas A&M Aggies .6890
10 Oklahoma State Cowboys .5837
11 Louisville Cardinals .5830
12 South Carolina Gamecocks .5746
13 Oklahoma Sooners .5653
14 UCLA Bruins .4874
15 Michigan Wolverines .3713
16 Miami Hurricanes .3249

Simulated BCS Rankings Week Two: Stanford Hops To No. 3, Michigan Up To No. 12

biggerbcslogo

While No. 1 Alabama rested at home in the second weekend of the 2013 season, things in the Crimson Tide’s own conference and around the country got a bit of a rattling.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Stanford Cardinal
4 Clemson Tigers
5 Texas A&M Aggies
Scroll down for more

Georgia, which dropped a tough game to Clemson last weekend, rebounded with a victory over top-10 South Carolina, reviving their BCS strength and giving Clemson’s win all the more luster.

And yet, the Tigers fall a spot in the BCS, landing just behind No. 3 Stanford in this week’s simulated BCS rankings after the Cardinal made their season debut Saturday.

How did we figure these out? We made the following changes to the BCS formula, to account for the pieces we have and the pieces we’re missing:

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’re ONLY using the available, reasonably well-connected and up-to-date BCS computers, which at this point is just Massey’s non-BCS, Sagarin’s and Billingsley’s rankings. As the various computers are released before the start of the season, we’ll add them here and update the standings.
  • In total, we’ll say these rankings reflect the real BCS rankings with 50% accuracy

South Carolina’s loss actually turned out to help along teams unconnected with the early results. Teams like Stanford, Texas A&M and even Oregon picked up some of the points the Gamecocks vacated, as their BCS stock was strengthened while Clemson took a slight hit.

The computers also helped Stanford into the third position, as Billingsley named Stanford its No. 1 team this week, while Sagarin left Clemson out of the top handful of teams all together.

Louisville and Ohio State, which were keyed here early as teams lacking in computer faith, got a little boost this week, but still need plenty of help from their upcoming schedule to invigorate their respect in the mathematical element. The numbers, at least now, are not in the Buckeyes’ and Cardinals’ favor, but that could change as we move forward.

Elsewhere, Michigan, Northwestern and Baylor secure spots in the top 16 after strong weekend victories

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the second week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — September 9

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9887
2 Oregon Ducks .9167
3 Stanford Cardinal .8745
4 Clemson Tigers .7949
5 Texas A&M Aggies .7722
6 Ohio State Buckeyes .7311
7 LSU Tigers .7261
8 Georgia Bulldogs .7253
9 Florida State Seminoles .6572
10 Louisville Cardinals .6111
11 South Carolina Gamecocks .5715
12 Michigan Wolverines .5609
13 Oklahoma State Cowboys .5582
14 Oklahoma Sooners .5443
15 Northwestern Wildcats .2999
16 Baylor Bears .2983

Simulated BCS Rankings Week One: Clemson Up To No. 3, Alabama Already Pulling Away

biggerbcslogo

Funny what one big win can do for your BCS hopes and dreams. No team can recognize that as much as Clemson can after the first week of the last BCS season, after a huge home win over Georgia gave the Tigers a boost to No. 3 in this week’s simulated BCS rankings.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Clemson Tigers
4 Stanford Cardinal
5 South Carolina Gamecocks
Scroll down for more

You’re familiar already with the top two teams, No. 1 Alabama and No. 2 Oregon, who have become staples at the top of all kinds of BCS standings. But Clemson, though resurgent, has staked an early claim to the team to watch as the season wears on.

How did we get there? We’ve made the following changes to the BCS formula, to account for the pieces we have and the pieces we’re missing:

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’re ONLY using the available and up-to-date BCS computers, which at this point is just Massey’s non-BCS, Sagarin’s and Billingsley’s rankings. As the various computers are released before the start of the season, we’ll add them here and update the standings.
  • In total, we’ll say with 44.4% accuracy that this is a good estimation of the BCS rankings

So it’s Clemson that makes the big leap, taking the No. 3 spot away from the same Bulldogs they beat on Saturday night. Behind them land the Pac-12’s other hope for BCS glory, Stanford, and the SEC’s second-best hope so far, South Carolina.

Ohio State, although landing comfortably in the top-three of both human element polls, suffers dearly from the three available computers, pulling in an average ranking of 13.6 despite their support across the board in the human element. Louisville also suffers terrible from the computers, not landing in the top-25 in two of the three available rankings.

Also of note is the strength of Alabama’s lead this early in the year. With one game gone, the Crimson Tide have a shockingly large lead of more than .1000, a big gulf for any team to cross.

But enough talk, explore our BCS Know How simulated preseason standings for yourself!

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings at the end of the first week:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — September 3

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9983
2 Oregon Ducks .8865
3 Clemson Tigers .8262
4 Stanford Cardinal .8178
5 South Carolina Gamecocks .7870
6 Ohio State Buckeyes .7705
7 Texas A&M Aggies .7662
8 LSU Tigers .6816
9 Florida Gators .6172
10 Florida State Seminoles .6152
11 Georgia Bulldogs .6091
12 Notre Dame Fighting Irish .5733
13 Oklahoma State Cowboys .5627
14 Louisville Cardinals .5267
15 Oklahoma Sooners .4881
16 Texas Longhorns .3806

UPDATED Simulated Preseason BCS Rankings: Alabama, Oregon Preseason BCS Favorites

If one thing’s been constant throughout the final BCS era, it’s been the SEC. This year, the BCS’s last, looks to be little different.

Simulated BCS Rankings
Rank Team
1 Alabama Crimson Tide
2 Oregon Ducks
3 Georgia Bulldogs
4 Texas A&M Aggies
5 Stanford Cardinal
Scroll down for more

By this point, most know that 2013 is going to be the BCS’s swan song. And though few are sad to see it go, it’s still here to crown a national champion for one more year before the College Football Playoff takes over.

And like in the seven years that have preceded this one, it looks ripe for an SEC to finish the year on top.

Every year at BCS Know How, we’ve put together some simulated BCS rankings as the season comes close, and as the season progresses before the real BCS hits the airwaves. Here, we’ve started early, using a few adjustments to create an early look at what the BCS might look like if it came out today.

We’ve made the following substitutions/changes to the BCS formula as it now stands:

  • We’ve replaced the Harris Poll, which wont be available until mid-October, with the AP Poll
  • We’re ONLY using the available and up-to-date BCS computers, which at this point is just Massey’s non-BCS and Billingsley’s rankings. As the various computers are released before the start of the season, we’ll add them here and update the standings.

With those changes implemented, Alabama — of course — lands at No. 1. Unlike in the available AP and Coaches’ Poll, however, Oregon grabs the No. 2 spot.

This is because of those pesky computers. After coasting to a 12-0 record last season on what the computers viewed as an easy schedule, Ohio State starts the season well down the list in terms of preseason numerical favorites at No. 4. They’ll have some work to do.

Georgia and Texas A&M give the SEC three of the top six teams in these simulated BCS rankings before Pac-12 co-combatant of the Ducks, Stanford, lands at No. 5.

Florida and LSU also land in the top 11, while reigning national runner-up, Notre Dame, falls all the way to No. 9.

But enough talk, explore our BCS Know How simulated preseason standings for yourself!

Here are the simulated preseason BCS rankings as of August 28:

2013 Simulated BCS Standings — Preseason

Rank Team BCS Score
1 Alabama Crimson Tide .9985
2 Oregon Ducks .9171
3 Georgia Bulldogs .8197
4 Ohio State Buckeyes .8169
5 Stanford Cardinal .8056
6 Texas A&M Aggies .7733
7 South Carolina Gamecocks .7541
8 Clemson Tigers .6325
9 Notre Dame Fighting Irish .6204
10 Florida Gators .6187
11 LSU Tigers .5696
12 Louisville Cardinals .5488
13 Florida State Seminoles .5293
14 Oklahoma Sooners .4687
15 Oklahoma State Cowboys .4172
16 Texas Longhorns .3909

Transparency for the college football playoff selection committee

Yesterday, BCS executive director Bill Hancock suggested to CBS’s Dennis Dodd that a media member might serve as an ombudsman of sorts for college football’s playoff selection committee starting in 2014. While it’s a nice idea, and something that might appease transparency junkies, it’s a little too much, too soon.

Let’s instead adapt an already transparency-seeking endeavor in postseason college sports — the yearly criticism levied against the men’s NCAA basketball selection committee on Selection Sunday — and make it a weekly exercise for college football.

Every Selection Sunday in March, after the CBS crew finishes lauding the NCAA men’s basketball tournament selection committee’s 68 teams and throwing softball questions without even expecting straight answers (see last year’s committee members fending off questions about Missouri’s No. 2 seed), many turn to ESPN to see Jay Bilas rip the committee in two.

Bilas is a breath of fresh air every year in this regard. The only shortfall is Bilas doesn’t ever get to say it face-to-face and on camera to the committee chairs on the night.

This is what college football needs. Not someone inside the room, but someone outside it that can dialogue with committee members weekly and call them on their perceived mistakes or oversights. Even a simple explanation of their weekly thought process would give us unprecedented access and ensure a little more accountability.

And guess what? The playoff that is slowly but surely coming together is setting itself up to create not just a once-yearly opportunity for some good old-fashioned awkward moments between committee members and analysts, but weekly exercises in just that.

Remember this? 

Billy Packer once stood up to the basketball committee members on live TV, in 2006, when he thought the committee overlooked power conferences for the last spots in the bracket. Not a popular opinion, but boy, was it entertaining and awkward television. Since then, Packer has left CBS and the network has shied away from truly calling out the committee on much of anything. But it was entertaining, and when Packer basically had to eat his words — yeah, that was the year No. 11 George Mason made the Final Four — the committee felt vindicated. Equally, there have been times when analysts saw their criticism validated by bubble teams’ poor performances.

A group of college football Bilases, armed with a weekly ranking of the committee’s top 20 teams, as reportedshould be given the opportunity to call the committee on their perceived mistakes on a week-to-week basis and then actually ask them about it. The continual shifting of the landscape in college football would allow an ongoing dialogue between these analysts and committee members week after week, holding the committee accountable and answerable to their own decisions.

Imagine the banter of eight consecutive Selection Sundays, but instead of conversations with no potential to effect change as they serve in basketball, we’d get conversations well capable of changing the landscape of the coming four-team playoff.

Forget putting a media member in the board room — you and I both know that when faced with the presence or looming danger of the media, these NCAA big wigs turn on the PC weightlessness to their conversation with ease. Let them yell, scream, curse and demean each other and any team they please to each other. That’s the only way we’ll get good argument. Then, when all that’s said and done and they have their top-20, have a few of them face a panel of analysts. The committee will have to answer for the top-20 they’ve just released, and if something smells fishy, or even suggests at some coming controversy, have them address it right away.

This is almost a no-brainer.

There’s already a time spot for it. ESPN’s over-long “BCS Countdown” provides a perfect timeslot to release the rankings and meaningfully interview committee members.

There are some great analysts at ESPN (who would obviously be the ones in charge of the whole shebang) who could ask the right questions. Chris Fowler, Rece Davis, Ivan Maisel and maybe current BCS analyst Bruce Edwards (he’ll be out of a job come 2014) could do well.

And there’s a real call for something of this nature. Everybody wants transparency, we just don’t know what it means. So why not put it to the test? We’d get a half-hour of appointment television, with Twitter arguments and blog fodder for days to boot. Why not?

OSU and Va. Tech Upset: How It Could Have Been Worse For the Nation’s Best

vatechohiostatelossWell that certainly lived up to the hype.

Just one day before the first BCS standings of the year are released, a day filled with interesting matchups and conference battles delivered drama and excitement around the country. At the end of the day, two top eight teams had fallen. But how close were we to having five fall on Saturday?

Let’s count the ways:

A game-saving tackle by Colt McCoy, a missed field goal, and a flubbed final five yards that fell incomplete, ended the game, and then didn’t, and then did.

Colt McCoy, Heisman candidate extraordinaire, was struggling. He was having one of his worst days as a Longhorn, and he was dragged down with a cold. He had also just witnessed the possible ending of friend Sam Bradford’s college career. And then he threw an interception.

As the only Longhorn DB Brian Jackson had to beat to score, McCoy looked helpless, but a great effort from the senior having a tough day stopped him from scoring, and likely saved the Longhorn’s chances of a national title, and the game ended 16-13 in Texas’s favor.

Alabama took Florida to the brink of defeat, playing right alongside Tim Tebow, his Gator offense and even their defense, driving the field multiple times. But missed field goals doomed the Razorbacks, and a late field goal from the Gators assured victory, 23-20.

And USC, seemingly cruising through Notre Dame again, instead found the Irish driving with a chance to score a tying touchdown, taking advantage of Trojan penalties all the way to the USC five-yard line. An incomplete pass from Jimmy Clausen seemed to end the Irish’s upset bid, but review put a second back on the clock, only for Clausen to throw an errant pass once again, sealing Trojan victory.

Ohio State and Virginia Tech weren’t so lucky, however, and will likely shake up what had been projected BCS standings until this point, but are now the real deal.

The Hokies were a projected No. 3, which certainly wont be the way it looks after they were unable to defeat ACC rival Georgia Tech, instead look for them to possibly fall all the way out of the top 12, with Georgia Tech making an appearance inside the first BCS top 12.

Boise State – who also survived an upset bid earlier this week – Texas and USC should all benefit from the Hokies sudden lack of energy from a team many considered the best one loss team in the nation.

Recently confirmed class of the Big East Cincinnati, Iowa and TCU should all benefit from the Buckeye’s shocking loss to Purdue.

The first official BCS standings are released tomorrow, but until then, here’s a quick stab at what the top 8 might look like without any polling info.

Projected BCS Standings October 18th

Rank Team
1 Florida
2 Alabama
3 Texas
4 Boise State
5 USC
6 LSU
7 Cincinnati
8 Iowa